About your Search

20130117
20130125
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3
this at all, richard, to discredit the president on foreign policy? >> i have to say that i think that benghazi is largely a function of people who suffer from obama-derangement syndrome, because i think that people who are kind of looking at the facts, does this trace to the white house, and does it trace to the president or the secretary of the state, and i h think that every bit of information that we have so far the answer to all of the questions so far is no. might they keep hammering it? of course, but at the end of the day, i don't believe we will look back in the second term and said, man, they should have gotten that benghazi behind them, because they have. >> and do you think that we will be talking about benghazi coming up? >> we, the facts and the more that the white house and the administration says this happened and by the way, that happened and not just from the partisan perspective, but coming from the state department and so forth, and with all respect, it is the senate role to ask the tough questions and the question is whether or not it is a legitimate con ver
're also entering into a new age of some beg decision in foreign policy because this country right now is starting to get some adversaries around the world because of our drone policy. that was not the situation four years ago. so this is -- our foreign policy is going to be judged on just how aggressive we get with that, and there's a growing concern in the community across the country about the drone attacks. just how many innocent people are we killing? there's been concerted conversation about we have to reel this in, and president obama, i think, is going to hear a great deal about that when it comes to foreign policy coming up here in the coming months. just how aggressive are we going to get? >> that specific reference that we should not be in a state of perpetual war. >> we are, and it's a different kind of war. >> i mean, that's the -- legally that's the justification that they cite for saying why it is that we can kill people in places where we're technically not waging some sort of war. that there is a global war still underway, and the authorization of using military force
of how progressive this message was is the foreign policy piece. advocating for engagement against the backdrop of a hostage situation in algeria is a very firm flag to plant in the ground. to say that as we see al qaeda cells multiplying, taking over a host of failed states in north africa and now west africa. to say these are not our enemies, that we can come in peace, that we can have peaceable relations with evil actors in the world is very much obama 1.0. for him to say that now i thought was really, really remarkable if you're talking about hawk versus dove, progressive versus conservative. >> i thought that was a direct message to the mullahs and to the people of iran. i spent some time with one family this week. i think he knows that the worst case scenario is war, it always is the worst case scenario and he's hoping somehow we can stop them from weaponizing. >> but chris -- >> nuclear weapons. >> i think this was a forthrightly liberal speech. i think that -- >> you're an eight. >> he said we are a country that doesn't -- that believes that every citizen deserves a decent
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3